Req #50029 [Com]: Weird invoke issue on class as property

Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=50029&edit=1 ID: 50029 Comment by: marc dot gray at gmail dot com Reported by: marc dot gray at gmail dot com Summary: Weird invoke issue on class as property Status: Analyzed Type: Feature/Change Request Package: Class/Object related Operating System: Ubuntu 9.04 PHP Version: 5.3.0 Block user comment: N Private report: N New Comment: I've been thinking about this since the same issue appears to exist with assigning a closure to a static variable too (tested in 5.3.5, 5.3.8 & 5.4alpha3. //---------------------------------- // Create a very basic static class class closureProperty { static public $myClosure; } // Assign a closure to a class property closureProperty::$myClosure = function() { echo('Hi'); }; // Fatal error: Function name must be a string closureProperty::$myClosure(); // Works as expected $safeCopy = closureProperty::$myClosure; $safeCopy(); //---------------------------------- I can understand why it happens with dynamic properties, apparently you can have a variable and function named identically? I admit I've never tried. I would propose making identically named variables and functions as deprecated (does anyone who's any good actually do that? Talk about poor readability...) and implement a collision warning in the mean time. I would also suggest this makes less sense in a static case (due to $ variable prefix) than it did in a dynamic case, and should be changed. If nothing else, some discussion on the matter would be lovely. Thoughts? Previous Comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2011-02-07 22:36:54] dhaarbrink at gmail dot com @bkarwin: The control would be passed to __call(), since there is no way to disambiguate. __call() would then be responsible for deciding what to do. I have to agree with Matthew, it's a huge WTF. It just doesn't work as it should (that's beyond what is expected). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2010-04-07 20:22:38] bkarwin@php.net How would Matthew's suggestion work if a magic __call() method is present? class b { private $x; public function __call($method, $args) { echo "Called\n"; } function __construct() { $this->x = new a(); $this->x(); } } Should this execute $this->__call("x") and output "Called" or should it execute $this->x->__invoke() and output "Invoked"? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2010-04-07 14:52:19] ballouc at gmail dot com I'm in agreement with the Matt's last suggestion. I believe that errors should only be raised in the event of a collision. The current implementation of the __invoke method, IMO, would not perform as a third party developer would have anticipated. My personal choice would be to throw an E_WARNING for collisions as I have seen ~E_NOTICE far too often. Personally, I believe that an __invoke collision occurring would be more indicative of a developer error than intentional. If this is not the case, and you find many people readily anticipate having both foo() and __invoke called in succession, this would need to be discussed further as that is also a viable option. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2010-04-07 13:41:14] weierophinney@php.net I can understand wanting to ensure that collisions between existing methods and invokable properties don't occur, but when there aren't any collisions, it doesn't make sense. I'd argue that the following behavior should be implemented: * If no matching method exists, simply allow invoking. * If a matching method exists, call the method, and raise either an E_NOTICE or E_WARNING indicating the collision. Right now, it's a fairly big WTF moment -- you expect it to work, and instead get an E_FATAL. Copying to a temporary variable is code clutter, particularly when you know the object is invokable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-11-02 15:58:23] kalle@php.net There was lots of discussion about this, because it could override class methods like: class Test { private $closure; public function __construct() { $this->closure = function() { echo 'Hello World'; }; } public function closure() { echo 'Hello PHP'; } public function call() { $this->closure(); } } $test = new Test; // Call Test::$closure or Test::closure() now? $test->call(); What you need to do is to copy the instance into a variable like: $closoure = $this->closure; $closure(); ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=50029 -- Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=50029&edit=1